By Hassan Adow
As Kenya marks 15 years since the promulgation of the 2010 Constitution, debates have resurfaced on whether the country has too many counties. Surprisingly, even seasoned champions of devolution, including leaders of Raila Odinga’s calibre, are now advocating for a reduction in the number of counties, citing examples from countries such as the United States and Nigeria.
But Kenyans must never forget why the 2010 Constitution was overwhelmingly endorsed. The central promise that convinced millions to vote “Yes” was devolution. For the first time in our history, power and resources were devolved to the grassroots. The best thing that has happened to Kenya since independence is precisely this transfer of money and authority away from Nairobi to every county.
Why Devolution Matters
For decades, a handful of regions monopolized the lion’s share of Kenya’s wealth, treating national resources as their entitlement. Marginalized communities had little say in development and limited opportunities to manage their own affairs. Devolution changed that equation.
Today, every county receives an equitable share of national revenue. Communities once left behind are now managing their own resources, setting their own priorities, and enjoying development at their doorstep. County governments have created massive employment opportunities.
Each county employs at least 5,000 workers, while thousands of additional jobs have emerged through public investments and local spending. Small towns that were once stagnant under the old provincial system are now thriving, businesses are booming, and people are increasingly engaged in productive activity.
The False Narrative of Cost
Critics argue that counties are too expensive to maintain, but this is misleading. The real problem is not devolution — it is mismanagement of resources and national government overspending. Functions that were constitutionally assigned to counties are still being funded and implemented by the national government, leading to duplication and wastage.
Moreover, budget padding, inflated project costs, and runaway recurrent expenditure at the national level remain the biggest drain on Kenya’s finances. Our financial woes also stem from political over-representation: too many elected leaders drawing huge salaries and allowances, while the executive spends extravagantly to maintain political alliances in Parliament. These are the elephants in the room, not devolution.
What Fewer Counties Would Mean
Calls to reduce Kenya’s 47 counties to 20 or even 15 would have disastrous consequences. First, it would undermine access to critical services. Devolution has brought healthcare, water services, agriculture extension, and early childhood education closer to the people. Rolling back to fewer counties would mean ordinary Kenyans especially in rural and marginalized areas would have to travel long distances to access these essential services. That would undo years of progress.
Second, reducing counties would exacerbate resource conflicts. Devolution has helped calm tensions by ensuring each county has its own share of resources. If the number of counties is slashed, many communities will feel excluded once again, fuelling bitter struggles over who controls resources and development. This is not just a governance issue, it could easily spiral into ethnic and regional clashes.
Strengthening Accountability
No one can outrightly deny that corruption could exist at the county level. But the solution is not to kill devolution, it is to strengthen accountability.
Counties need stronger internal audit systems, independent procurement boards, citizen-driven oversight forums, and real consequences for misuse of funds. Technology can also play a key role: digitizing county revenue collection and expenditure monitoring can significantly reduce leakages.
At the same time, national institutions such as the Office of the Auditor-General, the Controller of Budget, and the Ethics and Anti-Corruption Commission (EACC) must be adequately empowered to act firmly on national and county-level pilferage. With effective controls, devolution can thrive without being undermined by corruption.
Devolution vs. Centralization
The call to reduce counties risks reintroducing the old centralized order that locked out most Kenyans from meaningful development. Devolution may not be perfect, but even in its worst form, it remains far superior to a centralized system.
Yes, corruption exists in counties, but corruption did not begin with devolution, it has plagued Kenya since independence. The only difference is that under centralization, only a few privileged individuals benefited, while today, money at least circulates at the grassroots.
The Way Forward
Rather than mutilating devolution, Kenya should focus on improving it. Stronger financial controls, efficient resource use, and citizen oversight will ensure counties deliver better value. Cutting counties is not reform — it is regression.
Devolution is the goose that lays Kenya’s golden eggs. It has brought services closer to the people, spread opportunities across the country, and offered millions of Kenyans a sense of inclusion and dignity. To roll back devolution would not only be a betrayal of the 2010 Constitution but also a betrayal of the people who voted for it with the hope of a more equitable Kenya.
Conclusion
The enemies of progress want to convince us that devolution is too costly, but the truth is that mismanagement, waste, and political excesses at the national level are the real culprits. Reducing counties would take critical services away from ordinary Kenyans, worsen resource conflicts, and drag the country back to an exclusionary past.
Kenyans must not fall for the temptation to weaken devolution. Instead, we should protect, strengthen, and perfect it because it remains the most transformative pillar of our Constitution and our democracy.
Hassan Adow, is an Economist and public policy analyst based in Wajir County
